EVO vs RXRX vs SDGR vs ABCL

For growth investors, AbCellera Biologics Inc.

(ABCL) is the stronger pick with 160. 6% revenue growth year-over-year, versus -5. 0% for Evotec SE (EVO). Analysts rate Evotec SE (EVO) a "Buy" — based on 7 analyst ratings — the highest consensus in this comparison. The "better buy" depends entirely on your goals: growth investors should weight revenue trajectory, value investors should weight P/E and PEG, and income investors should weight dividend yield and streak.

Over the past 5 years, Schrödinger, Inc.

(SDGR) delivered a total return of -80. 6%, compared to -88. 2% for Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RXRX). Over 10 years, the gap is even starker: EVO returned +132. 9% versus ABCL's -91. 8%. Past returns do not guarantee future results, and the stock with the higher historical return may already have its best growth priced in.

By beta (market sensitivity over 5 years), Evotec SE (EVO) is the lower-risk stock at 1.

08β versus Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 's 3. 18β — meaning RXRX is approximately 194% more volatile than EVO relative to the S&P 500. On balance sheet safety, Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (RXRX) carries a lower debt/equity ratio of 7% versus 55% for Evotec SE — giving it more financial flexibility in a downturn.

By revenue growth (latest reported year), AbCellera Biologics Inc.

(ABCL) is pulling ahead at 160. 6% versus -5. 0% for Evotec SE (EVO). On earnings-per-share growth, the picture is similar: Evotec SE grew EPS 50. 0% year-over-year, compared to 10. 9% for AbCellera Biologics Inc.. Over a 3-year CAGR, RXRX leads at 23. 5% annualised revenue growth. Higher growth typically commands a higher valuation multiple — check whether the premium P/E or P/S is justified by the growth rate using the PEG ratio.

Evotec SE (EVO) is the more profitable company, earning -13.

1% net margin versus -863. 4% for Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. — meaning it keeps -13. 1% of every revenue dollar as bottom-line profit. Operating margin tells a similar story: EVO leads at -17. 9% versus -867. 9% for RXRX. At the gross margin level — before operating expenses — SDGR leads at 55. 7%, reflecting greater pricing power or product mix advantage. Stronger margins indicate durable pricing power, lower cost of revenue, or higher mix of software/services. They are one of the clearest signs of business quality.

None of the stocks in this comparison currently pay a material dividend.

All are effectively zero-yield and should be held for capital appreciation rather than income.

For long-horizon retirement investors, Evotec SE (EVO) is the stronger choice — it scores higher on the combination of lower volatility, dividend reliability, and long-term compounding (low volatility (β 1.

08), +132. 9% 10Y return). AbCellera Biologics Inc. (ABCL) carries a higher beta of 2. 31 — meaning larger drawdowns in market downturns, which matters significantly when you cannot wait years for a recovery. Both have compounded well over 10 years (EVO: +132. 9%, ABCL: -91. 8%), confirming both are viable long-term holds — but the lower-volatility option typically results in less emotional selling during corrections. Retirement portfolios generally favour predictability over maximum returns. Consult a financial advisor before making allocation decisions.

Both stocks operate in the Healthcare sector, making this a peer-level intra-sector comparison — the same macro tailwinds and headwinds will affect both.

In terms of investment character: EVO is a small-cap quality compounder stock; RXRX is a small-cap high-growth stock; SDGR is a small-cap high-growth stock; ABCL is a small-cap high-growth stock. These fundamental differences mean investors should not choose between them on a single metric — the "better stock" depends entirely on which of these characteristics aligns with your investment strategy.